Tax whingers need to be reminded of ‘fair go’ values

Like Dr Tom Hird, I am also fed up with listening to selfish tax whingers (“Spare me all the whining on tax”, May 28). As a household, we have been generously rewarded with the tax benefits available to business owners, but nevertheless we welcome the changes that are coming. Dr Hird is right that there are risks in running a business, but they are associated with rewards not available to all. We all use hospitals, roads, schools, public transport. Being fortunate, why shouldn’t we be asked to pay more for them under a more equitable system? Why should the lion’s share of the burden be on employees doing the jobs we couldn’t live without? A society is a web. We are all connected. It’s time our economic policy reflected this reality. It may also be something some of our younger “entrepreneurs” might like to reflect upon. Elisabeth Goodsall, Wahroonga

Thank you, Tom, for an erudite and balanced explanation of what is really at the core of the federal budget’s tax changes. Ross Gittins would be proud of you. The bleating from the vested interests and the political right fly in the face of the constant demands for Aussie values. What values? Mateship, egalitarianism, a fair go for all? Imagine the outcry if one team at the start of a match was automatically given a 20-point start. In effect, that is the case, and as Tom so eloquently points out, the real argument should be whether the rules are fair or not. The idea that the hard-earned dollar of one worker is worth less than another’s is hard to swallow. Fair go, mate. And the idea that the changes will be the death of business starts-ups is fanciful. In the Australian vernacular: if there is a quid to be made, someone will give it a go. Peter Robertson, Stanmore

I’d just like to thank you for publishing Tom Hird’s article. There’s a sly campaign for some to dodge paying their share. The numbers tell the real story. Tom has highlighted the great tax advantage trusts have over PAYG employees. Australians pay taxes to support the services and infrastructure we need and want as a society. Why should a group pay far less than everyone else yet have the same entitlements? Good on the government for doing something about this loophole.
Ray Gilmour, Blaxland

The elephant in the room for so-called “start-ups” is that many them do not deserve subsidisation. Sensible public policy would allow tax concessions only for businesses that will eventually lift Australian living standards. Making money for the founders is not an adequate justification. I struggle to see how improved real estate marketing or aggregating loan offers fits that criteria. Do we really need more skin-care products or fitness advice? In fact, these organisations strip thousands of employees from other businesses that are struggling to produce the goods and services we need. We have a higher education policy that differentiates between courses via HECS charges as a matter of public policy. I see no reason why governments cannot do the same when it comes to the taxation of start-ups as a matter of good public policy, despite the inevitable cries of government picking winners. Mark Tierney, North Kellyville

Tom Hird explains in simple terms how you manage your tax affairs without being too affected by the proposed CGT tax changes. Entrepreneurs are supposed to be intelligent people. If they prefer not to study or consult their tax advisers to manage their affairs, that’s their problem. Having a go at the prime minister only shows their sense of entitlement. The government is supporting small businesses in other ways. Peng Ee, Castle Cove

Dismissal was correct

At the risk of being convicted of treason in my home state of Queensland, I completely support the decision of State of Origin referee Ashley Klein to order off a Queensland player for a physically damaging act of foul play (“‘I’d like that moment back’: Ponga reacts to controversial send-off”, May 28). If the cream of rugby league talent, playing at the highest level of the game, are not obliged to adhere to the laws of the game, who is? Surely those in charge of “player welfare” in rugby league will today be applauding Ashley Klein. How many more cases of previous generations of brain-damaged rugby league players do we need to hear of before we learn to appreciate how valuable the likes of referee Ashley Klein actually are? Crispin Walters, Chapel Hill (Qld)

Act for the child

Firstly, I will not use the label used to identify the women who left the country in various circumstances when they were children or barely adults. Not content with using them to score political points, we now have the situation where a child with serious injuries is being callously left to suffer (“Records reveal suffering of IS-linked child”, May 28). How much lower can politicians and this country go than punishing innocent children for matters that relate to their parents. Why was it fine to bring women and children home over recent years and now it isn’t? Bring the woman and child home – they have a right to be here and it is obvious the raising of the child would be the focus of the woman. Surely there is no better way of displaying our “Australian values” than repatriating the woman and child, treating the child’s injuries and providing the child with all it needs to recover from the trauma they have experienced. Kindness is more beneficial than contempt. The least the prime minister and the leader of the opposition could do is have the courage to visit and look into the eyes of the child that they are leaving to suffer. Paul Tilbrook, Castle Hill

When interviewed before the recent arrival of more “ISIS brides” and their children, Anthony Albanese and Angus Taylor sounded as if they were both singing from the same song-sheet – one for which Pauline Hanson and Barnaby Joyce could have supplied the lyrics. Given that the object of their derision would be a stressed and travel-worn group of seven possibly traumatised mothers and their 12 tired and anxious children, both came across as posturing hardliners, frightened to reveal even a shred of compassion in case they lost more votes to One Nation, particularly knowing how Pauline Hanson and Barnaby Joyce would exploit the group’s arrival for political purposes (Letters, May 28). John Lewis, Thornleigh

While the federal government’s proposed overhaul of jobseeker services recognises that the current system is falling short, it will likely be of little comfort to those feeling the pinch most acutely right now (“Jobseeker services to get first overhaul in 30 years”, May 27). The reality is that the current rate of JobSeeker is too low. These changes do nothing to address the cost-of-living crisis that affects jobseekers and other people relying on income support. Our recent rental affordability research found there was not a single affordable rental in Greater Sydney for someone on JobSeeker. We cannot expect people to find a job if they cannot afford somewhere to live. Without an immediate increase to the payment, even well-meaning reforms like those announced risk falling short in practice and will not help those who sorely need it. If we are serious about helping people move into and maintain work, we must first ensure they can afford to live. Simon Miller, CEO, Anglicare Sydney

A tragic hatred

I am stunned at the vitriol aimed at those Jewish Australians who have appeared before the royal commission into antisemitism to recount their experiences (“Jews insulted after speaking out”, May 28). The cause of such hatred cannot be merely a hostility towards the current Israeli government’s manifold atrocities in the Middle East. That is just the excuse for an ingrained and irrational hatred of Jews themselves including, astonishingly, children. And throughout the millennia, Jews have been expected (as Shakespeare put it) to have “borne it with a patient shrug, for suff’rance is the badge of all our tribe”. I doubt we’ll ever get to a point where people are judged by their individual deeds rather than being scapegoated for their religion, race or sexual orientation. It is to weep. Adrian Connelly, Springwood

Divinity unknown

Whether G-d gave Israel to the Jews is beyond our human comprehension, so I’d suggest to correspondent Reg Lawler that perhaps it behoves us all to be a little humble about such statements (Letters, May 28). What we can know, with some cursory research, is that the Jews were buying the land back, not stealing it, before 1948. Then the UN voted for a partition plan, a Jewish and an Arab state. The Jews accepted. The Arabs refused and immediately invaded upon Israel’s independence.
What does your belief have to do with these facts? Israel must be the first and only “colonial settler” project in history whereby an indigenous people buy their ancestral homeland back and the international community officially votes to recognise that homeland. What G-d has to say about this, well, how about we accept that it’s beyond our limited understanding? Richard Abram, Bexley

Pokie politics

If you want a good example of why One Nation continues to rise in popularity, look at the NSW government’s attitude to the 90,000 poker machines in the state (“Why the premier won’t let pokies risk his election jackpot”, May 28). This is not a topic One Nation has addressed, but it’s symbolic of the situation. Why? Supported by professional opinions and government inquiries, the voters believe poker machines are damaging the community and supporting criminal activity. The state government ignores the voters’ concerns. It repeatedly demonstrates it favours Clubs NSW over everyday voters. For the voters, it is more confirmation that their concerns are of lesser value to the government than the welfare of big-money enterprises. It is this unwillingness to listen and react to voters that motivates some to seek out alternative representation. But when the default alternative is the Coalition, the traditional first line of protection for business, voters find themselves in limbo. Enter One Nation. Graham Hansen, Denistone

Bush is listening

Donald Hawes reminds us that certain sections of our community are campaigning to put the brakes on renewables infrastructure (Letters, May 28). There are naysayers, deniers, manipulators and even “smug fools”, but the facts speak for themselves: renewables are now supplying nearly half our electricity, despite some low investor confidence, and resistance from some communities (“Investors desert Australia’s renewables rollout”, May 26). We had a decade of delay on climate action from the Coalition. Then a climate-change denying US president gave license to fossil fuels companies globally to drill, baby, drill. Those fossil fuel companies are spending big on misinformation campaigns. However, all is not lost. In the bush, the independent, non-profit, 8000-member Farmers for Climate Action is a “movement of farmers, agricultural leaders and rural Australians working to influence Australia to adopt strong climate policies”. Not all country folk are naysayers. “Europe is suffering heatwaves, the seas are rising in Indonesia”. It’s our local and global responsibility to keep working to reverse that trend. Fiona Colin, Malvern East (Vic)

Beauty obliterated

The destruction of our historic suburbs in the name of progress continues apace. I live on the north shore, where there are many grand old houses. Recently, one of those in my street was unceremoniously demolished. The home was more than 100 years old, in excellent condition with a beautiful slate tile roof and had lush well-cared-for gardens and lawns. The wreckers moved in and smashed it to pieces. The meandering stone pathways, substantial sandstone walls and sandstone fence were ripped out, the English slate tiles on the roof and terracotta chimney pots thrown to the ground, the walls, windows and doors pounded and destroyed by giant machines. Whatever they build in its place will never come close to the elegance, substance, charm and warmth of that grand old structure and will have zero historical significance. What a terrible loss. Jenny Docker-Harris, Gordon

All money, no taste

The mind boggles at the thought of a UFC, described as “human cockfighting”, being held on the White House lawn. Of course, it is just another money-making event for Donald Trump and his friends (“Trump to mark 80th birthday with UFC fight at White House”, May 27). Josephine Piper, Miranda

Well off target

It beggars belief that the ASIO does not have access to the National Firearms Registry (“Troubled NSW Firearms Registry is a ‘shambles’”, May 28). This is the equivalent of the police being denied access to a paedophile’s employment record. In light of the recent Bondi shooting by a gun club member, why are we handcuffing our security agency? This shortcoming should be immediately rectified. Larry Woldenberg, Forest Lodge

Apologetic gesture

The only way Australians will have to at least acknowledge National Sorry Day is to make it a public holiday (Letters, May 28) – perhaps in lieu of a foreign monarch’s faux birthday holiday. Nigel Vertigan, Wentworth Falls

Clue is in the name

Why not leave well alone and name the new suburb on Glebe Island the historically significant … Glebe Island. Ian Falconer, Turramurra

Sounds of silence

Zoya Patel and others imprisoned in the world of soulless digital efficiency might reflect (via texting of course) on the timeless wisdom of O. Henry: “Inject a few raisins of conversation into the tasteless dough of existence” (“I don’t make phone calls. Not even if it’s an emergency”, May 27). Brian Haisman, Winmalee

I suspect Zoya Patel is just being deliberately controversial. I would have preferred to tell her that myself, but she isn’t answering my calls. John Mizon, Collaroy

• To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
• The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.